Elo Ranking System + Matchmaking

Originally Posted by Indianapolis Jones

Or we could just do what we shoulda done the thousandth time we perma banned him.... Perma ban him. And erase his account for good measure. Just fking do it and stick to it ffs. He's owed no right/goodwill.

Wrong thread? Lol

Originally Posted by Indianapolis Jones

Or we could just do what we shoulda done the thousandth time we perma banned him.... Perma ban him. And erase his account for good measure. Just fking do it and stick to it ffs. He's owed no right/goodwill.

Wrong thread? Lol

[Esso]

I like aspects of it...eventually snipers not being rewarded with rankings points for beating up on noobs and scrubs would be ideal. Taking everyone's current rankings away may hurt some of the membership, as some active folks still put stock in all that. If you start from zero, for quite a while, battlers who are significantly more active and accumulate wins will be assigned a higher ranking regardless of quality of opponent even though it would probably catch up with them eventually....most of the best battlers on this site seem to embrace quality over quantity so the rankings may never stop skewing towards activity>actual skill.

[Esso]

I like aspects of it...eventually snipers not being rewarded with rankings points for beating up on noobs and scrubs would be ideal. Taking everyone's current rankings away may hurt some of the membership, as some active folks still put stock in all that. If you start from zero, for quite a while, battlers who are significantly more active and accumulate wins will be assigned a higher ranking regardless of quality of opponent even though it would probably catch up with them eventually....most of the best battlers on this site seem to embrace quality over quantity so the rankings may never stop skewing towards activity>actual skill.

[ILLoKWENT]

Originally Posted by Mindless

You would pick your own battles. It's kind of based on the way that RPG stats are gained in that you can only level up by facing opponents with stats that are equal to or higher than your own. Basically we're applying the law of diminishing returns to battling. The difference is that someone low ranked doesn't risk as much facing someone much higher than them.



I kind of like this but I think that's too much information to give. IMO, the only information anyone should have on anyone is their current rank, w/l and ESL. If you give people too much insight into the system they figure out a way to game it and use it in ways it wasn't intended. Also, what would a weak battler see on the page of a strong battler? What's the cap on point loss?



Freeze the current rankings and put them somewhere and say "This is our old ranking system". Then you restart everyone at zero.

Also, forced match-ups is lame unless it's voluntary. What I mean by that is, for the general system it's bad. If it were it's own system it could be fun though. I don't see it ever happening though.

on goldmic ,a weak battler ex.. mc gay would see UA with a +60/-5, or +35/-5...... . UA would see the exact opposite.. so if he battled mc gay and lost, he would lose 60 points and drop in rating. . if UA saw RULES profile then it would be +15/-15..

[ILLoKWENT]

Originally Posted by Mindless

You would pick your own battles. It's kind of based on the way that RPG stats are gained in that you can only level up by facing opponents with stats that are equal to or higher than your own. Basically we're applying the law of diminishing returns to battling. The difference is that someone low ranked doesn't risk as much facing someone much higher than them.



I kind of like this but I think that's too much information to give. IMO, the only information anyone should have on anyone is their current rank, w/l and ESL. If you give people too much insight into the system they figure out a way to game it and use it in ways it wasn't intended. Also, what would a weak battler see on the page of a strong battler? What's the cap on point loss?



Freeze the current rankings and put them somewhere and say "This is our old ranking system". Then you restart everyone at zero.

Also, forced match-ups is lame unless it's voluntary. What I mean by that is, for the general system it's bad. If it were it's own system it could be fun though. I don't see it ever happening though.

on goldmic ,a weak battler ex.. mc gay would see UA with a +60/-5, or +35/-5...... . UA would see the exact opposite.. so if he battled mc gay and lost, he would lose 60 points and drop in rating. . if UA saw RULES profile then it would be +15/-15..

[Godbody]

Originally Posted by Indianapolis Jones

Pointless because you don't have the userbase to pull it off plus this isn't a game where raw mechanical skill, knowledge on the latest metas from balance patches and partying up vs solos take president over knowing who you're VSing. Theres a reason people here prefer to pre arrange battles\have 3 days notice from tourneys ect. Plus most people prefer to pick their opponents spontainiously to get themselves motivated rather than have ELO RNG dictate they face *insert name* For the tenth time this week because the site doesn't have the numbers to support an ELO MM.
Which ever way you want to slice it, it wont work.

It's essentially blind battles based on tiers. It'll work. I'm not saying LB scrap opens/personals and rely solely on matchmaking. THAT wouldn't work, because of course we don't have enough users.

As far as metas and partying up..what are you talking about? this is Letsbeef not Xbox. none of that shit is pertinent or relevant unless you're suggesting matchmaking supports 2v2,4v4, etc. Which is why we have crew battling

ELO is better than a points system because points are there for show, and while the amount of points you lose/gain differs based on who you battle, the whole point is you battle whoever the fuck you want anyway. Which is similar to the points system LB already has

on ELO you're not battling whoever the fuck you want and getting variable amounts of points from 10 to 200. You're battling nearly equally skilled battlers everytime, and you'll have to beat 3 or 4 dudes at your skill level to go up a tier. Shit sounds accurate af to me. Moreso than points, because again, you can beat on noobs and all types of shit to exploit that system

[Godbody]

Originally Posted by Indianapolis Jones

Pointless because you don't have the userbase to pull it off plus this isn't a game where raw mechanical skill, knowledge on the latest metas from balance patches and partying up vs solos take president over knowing who you're VSing. Theres a reason people here prefer to pre arrange battles\have 3 days notice from tourneys ect. Plus most people prefer to pick their opponents spontainiously to get themselves motivated rather than have ELO RNG dictate they face *insert name* For the tenth time this week because the site doesn't have the numbers to support an ELO MM.
Which ever way you want to slice it, it wont work.

It's essentially blind battles based on tiers. It'll work. I'm not saying LB scrap opens/personals and rely solely on matchmaking. THAT wouldn't work, because of course we don't have enough users.

As far as metas and partying up..what are you talking about? this is Letsbeef not Xbox. none of that shit is pertinent or relevant unless you're suggesting matchmaking supports 2v2,4v4, etc. Which is why we have crew battling

ELO is better than a points system because points are there for show, and while the amount of points you lose/gain differs based on who you battle, the whole point is you battle whoever the fuck you want anyway. Which is similar to the points system LB already has

on ELO you're not battling whoever the fuck you want and getting variable amounts of points from 10 to 200. You're battling nearly equally skilled battlers everytime, and you'll have to beat 3 or 4 dudes at your skill level to go up a tier. Shit sounds accurate af to me. Moreso than points, because again, you can beat on noobs and all types of shit to exploit that system

[J u s T C]

Originally Posted by Godbody

As far as metas and partying up..what are you talking about? this is Letsbeef not Xbox. none of that shit is pertinent or relevant unless you're suggesting matchmaking supports 2v2,4v4, etc. Which is why we have crew battling

Thats my point. I'm saying LB isn't a game with these factors. On L.B a big part is Knowing who your opponent is. On games you dont need to know because all you need is to know your party members strengths/weaknesses/tendancies along with your own raw skill. Thats why ELO RNG MM is a none factor. On L.B it's a hinderance fora big part of it's nature, The personal side. You game because you wanna game. You battle because you wanna clown that PARTICULAR guy low rating/Talking shit about you (A lot of the time) it's more emotion based.

[J u s T C]

Originally Posted by Godbody

As far as metas and partying up..what are you talking about? this is Letsbeef not Xbox. none of that shit is pertinent or relevant unless you're suggesting matchmaking supports 2v2,4v4, etc. Which is why we have crew battling

Thats my point. I'm saying LB isn't a game with these factors. On L.B a big part is Knowing who your opponent is. On games you dont need to know because all you need is to know your party members strengths/weaknesses/tendancies along with your own raw skill. Thats why ELO RNG MM is a none factor. On L.B it's a hinderance fora big part of it's nature, The personal side. You game because you wanna game. You battle because you wanna clown that PARTICULAR guy low rating/Talking shit about you (A lot of the time) it's more emotion based.

This is alright if you want Letsbeef to continue having the numbers that it currently does. But almost always, the reason numbers on the site were huge were because people liked to focus on trying to get #1 of the month, or #1 all time, and that kept them around.

This is alright if you want Letsbeef to continue having the numbers that it currently does. But almost always, the reason numbers on the site were huge were because people liked to focus on trying to get #1 of the month, or #1 all time, and that kept them around.

[Godbody]

Originally Posted by Schnerch Party

This is alright if you want Letsbeef to continue having the numbers that it currently does. But almost always, the reason numbers on the site were huge were because people liked to focus on trying to get #1 of the month, or #1 all time, and that kept them around.

#1 rank for the month & #1 all time dont mean shit and haven't meant shit for a while. Noobs occupy the Top 10 all the time and when it actually meant shit, it was cuz you got an emcee item as a prize. Plus we can still keep the LB points system and have ELO ranks seperate. Most games I play that have ELO ranks actually have 2 ranks. A linear rank from lvl 1 to 100 (for casuals), and a hidden, 'TrueSkill' rank which is the ELO rank and is used in competitive playlists. LB could do the exact same thing. Add a new ranking system that's apart from the old joint.

Points systems are based on QUANTITY. Sure they're based on quality too, since you get more points for beating better battlers. But if you go 100-0 from battling noobs you could end up #1 & you're gaming the shit out of the points system that way. You can't game ELO from battling noobs, because ELO wouldn't let you battle niggas outside of your skill range. ELO systems are based on QUALITY. You'd have to battle similarly skilled/ranked battlers to go up in rank. If you're a Platinum/Diamond battler, with an ELO system, Letsbeef wouldn't permit you to battle a Bronze/Silver battler since the skill gap is too wide. Ya'll talking about points that I can poke 100 holes in, exploit, and game the fuck out of...vs a widely regarded ELO system that works on understandable logic and is utilized by a shit ton of games

ya'll starting to understand how the shit would work now?

[Godbody]

Originally Posted by Schnerch Party

This is alright if you want Letsbeef to continue having the numbers that it currently does. But almost always, the reason numbers on the site were huge were because people liked to focus on trying to get #1 of the month, or #1 all time, and that kept them around.

#1 rank for the month & #1 all time dont mean shit and haven't meant shit for a while. Noobs occupy the Top 10 all the time and when it actually meant shit, it was cuz you got an emcee item as a prize. Plus we can still keep the LB points system and have ELO ranks seperate. Most games I play that have ELO ranks actually have 2 ranks. A linear rank from lvl 1 to 100 (for casuals), and a hidden, 'TrueSkill' rank which is the ELO rank and is used in competitive playlists. LB could do the exact same thing. Add a new ranking system that's apart from the old joint.

Points systems are based on QUANTITY. Sure they're based on quality too, since you get more points for beating better battlers. But if you go 100-0 from battling noobs you could end up #1 & you're gaming the shit out of the points system that way. You can't game ELO from battling noobs, because ELO wouldn't let you battle niggas outside of your skill range. ELO systems are based on QUALITY. You'd have to battle similarly skilled/ranked battlers to go up in rank. If you're a Platinum/Diamond battler, with an ELO system, Letsbeef wouldn't permit you to battle a Bronze/Silver battler since the skill gap is too wide. Ya'll talking about points that I can poke 100 holes in, exploit, and game the fuck out of...vs a widely regarded ELO system that works on understandable logic and is utilized by a shit ton of games

ya'll starting to understand how the shit would work now?

Originally Posted by Godbody

#1 and #2 dont mean shit and haven't meant shit for a while. Noobs occupy the Top 10 all the time and when it actually meant shit, it was cuz you got an emcee item as a prize. Plus we can still keep the LB points system and have ELO ranks seperate. Most games I play that have ELO ranks actually have 2 ranks. A linear rank from lvl 1 to 100 (for casuals), and a hidden, 'TrueSkill' rank which is the ELO rank and is used in competitive playlists. LB could do the exact same thing. Add a new ranking system that's apart from the old joint.

And if we implement the currency system I suggested, you'll still be able to get all the emcee items and attain virtually w/e there is to be attained on LB. So combining that with matchmaking makes the Top 10 of the month shit useless.

Points systems are based on QUANTITY. Sure they're based on quality too, since you get more points for beating better battlers. But if you go 100-0 from battling noobs you're gaming the shit of the points system

ELO systems are based on QUALITY. You'd have to battle similarly skilled/ranked battlers to go up in rank, because the ELO system wouldn't allow a Platinum or Diamond battler to battle a Bronze or Silver battler.

ya'll starting to understand how the shit would work now?

"When it actually meant shit". During the site's height of activity it was H Nigga, Cash One, Real Rugger Rell, bestmceva and those guys in the top 10. I never ACTUALLY meant anything, it just helped activity big time.

LB needs quantity, not quality.

Originally Posted by Godbody

#1 and #2 dont mean shit and haven't meant shit for a while. Noobs occupy the Top 10 all the time and when it actually meant shit, it was cuz you got an emcee item as a prize. Plus we can still keep the LB points system and have ELO ranks seperate. Most games I play that have ELO ranks actually have 2 ranks. A linear rank from lvl 1 to 100 (for casuals), and a hidden, 'TrueSkill' rank which is the ELO rank and is used in competitive playlists. LB could do the exact same thing. Add a new ranking system that's apart from the old joint.

And if we implement the currency system I suggested, you'll still be able to get all the emcee items and attain virtually w/e there is to be attained on LB. So combining that with matchmaking makes the Top 10 of the month shit useless.

Points systems are based on QUANTITY. Sure they're based on quality too, since you get more points for beating better battlers. But if you go 100-0 from battling noobs you're gaming the shit of the points system

ELO systems are based on QUALITY. You'd have to battle similarly skilled/ranked battlers to go up in rank, because the ELO system wouldn't allow a Platinum or Diamond battler to battle a Bronze or Silver battler.

ya'll starting to understand how the shit would work now?

"When it actually meant shit". During the site's height of activity it was H Nigga, Cash One, Real Rugger Rell, bestmceva and those guys in the top 10. I never ACTUALLY meant anything, it just helped activity big time.

LB needs quantity, not quality.

We need a wrestling format.

We need a wrestling format.

[ILLoKWENT]

if battling noobs is such a huge problem , then make a parameter based on the persons record, which prevents him from battling someone with an extremely lopsided record? again, a program cant determine a text or audio battlers skill set.like in chess

[ILLoKWENT]

if battling noobs is such a huge problem , then make a parameter based on the persons record, which prevents him from battling someone with an extremely lopsided record? again, a program cant determine a text or audio battlers skill set.like in chess